Preoperative chemoradiation has become a common
approach to treat stage II and III rectal cancer at many institutions, including
The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) in Houston.[1-4] A
study from Uppsala, Sweden, has shown that preoperative radiation alone improves
pelvic control as compared with postoperative radiation alone. Another
Swedish trial in patients with rectal cancer demonstrated improved pelvic
control and overall survival using preoperative radiotherapy compared with
surgery alone. These studies, however, used preoperative radiotherapy without
Although a randomized trial has not been conducted to compare the efficacy of
preoperative chemoradiation to that of radiotherapy alone, concurrent
chemoradiation is commonly used in the United States. This practice is based on
extrapolation from trials in the postoperative setting[7,8] showing the
superiority of combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy over radiotherapy alone.
In this respect, the use of a protracted venous infusion of fluorouracil (5-FU)
has become the standard chemotherapy, based on data from a randomized trial
conducted by the Gastrointestinal Intergroup.
Patients who have had a complete clinical response to preoperative
chemoradiation have had better pelvic tumor control, sphincter preservation, and
overall survival than those who have had gross residual disease. Some patients
achieving a clinical complete response have even had rectal preserving surgery
(full-thickness local excision). These results emphasize the importance of
maximizing tumor response. The improvement in overall survival could be due to
higher pelvic control rates, or the response may indicate increased sensitivity
of distant micrometasteses to chemotherapy. Any increase in the response of
local disease to chemoradiation or distant micrometasteses to chemotherapy would
logically further improve outcome.
Use of chemotherapeutic agents that may be more effective than 5-FU as
radiosensitizers or as systemic agents may also lead to further improvements in
response and survival rates. Alternatively, molecular targeting could be used to
selectively enhance the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy regimens. Irinotecan
(CPT-11, Camptosar) is among the newer chemotherapeutic agents being explored in
combination with radiotherapy. Phase I studies have determined the maximum
tolerated dose of irinotecan when used with preoperative chemoradiation in
rectal cancer patients. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) is
currently evaluating irinotecan as a radiosensitizer in rectal cancer.
Because the primary limitation of chemoradiation is toxicity to normal
tissues, an improvement in therapeutic ratio could also be achieved by
incorporating tumor-selective agents. A number of processessuch as epidermal
growth factor receptor signaling, ras oncogene activation, the cyclooxygenase-2
(COX-2) enzyme, and angiogenesisappear to be tumor-selective in preclinical
models. Treatment with inhibitors of these molecular processes has shown
therapeutic efficacy in several preclinical tumor models, particularly when
combined with cytotoxic agents.
Among molecular target therapeutic strategies, counteracting COX-2 enzyme
activity seems promising, and significant preclinical and clinical testing of
this approach has been initiated. COX-2 overexpression occurs in various types
of human cancer and has been shown to correlate with poor prognosis.
Study results have shown that treatment of tumor-bearing mice with selective
COX-2 inhibitors enhances tumor response to radiation and chemotherapy.
Cyclooxygenase inhibitors have been shown to prevent colon cancer[16,17] and to
reduce the number of polyps in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.
Therefore, COX-2 inhibition has the potential to improve outcome for rectal
cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation.
Over the past decade at MDACC, patients with rectal cancer have been treated
with a preoperative radiotherapy dose of 45 Gy in 25 fractions prescribed to the
95% isodose line, with concomitant protracted venous infusion 5-FU at 300
mg/m2/d, Monday through Saturday morning. Since 1997, patients have been treated
in an ongoing prospective phase II trial that includes a concomitant boost
technique. With this technique, the same radiation dose is delivered to the
tumor and pelvic lymphatics (45 Gy) over 5 weeks, with an additional 1.5-Gy
boost as a second daily treatment separated from the first by 6 hours during the
fifth treatment week. The total dose to the primary tumor is 52.5 Gy prescribed
to the 95% isodose line. The boost is given to the gross tumor volume using a 3D
conformal technique, which minimizes normal tissue irradiation. Mesorectal
excision is carried out 4 to 8 weeks later. All patients receive four cycles of
adjuvant 5-FU and leucovorin after surgery.
Between 1990 and 2000, 390 stage II and III rectal cancer patients were
treated with preoperative pelvic chemoradiation followed by surgery. Presence of
microscopic or no residual disease was shown to be a favorable predictor of
pelvic control on univariate analysis (P = .02, Figure
1). A Cox regression
multivariate analysis showed a trend toward improved survival (P = .08,
unpublished observations). The only independently significant prognostic factor
for freedom from pelvic recurrence was clinical T stage. Actuarial freedom from
pelvic recurrence at 4 years was 90% for 354 patients with T3 disease vs 79% for
36 patients with T4 disease. At MDACC, clinical T4 disease is defined as
objective evidence of adjacent organ involvement on computed tomography (CT)
scan, physical examination, or endoscopic ultrasound.
While the concept is not universally accepted, several investigators have
reported that significant numbers of patients who were initially thought to
require abdominoperineal resection were able to undergo sphincter-preserving
procedures following preoperative chemoradiation. This phenomenon has been
demonstrated prospectively by preliminary results of the ongoing National
Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) R-03 trial, in which patients
were randomly assigned to receive preoperative or postoperative chemoradiation.
Surgeons entering patients in the study were encouraged to decide prospectively
which operation would be necessary. A sphincter-preserving procedure was
possible in 23% of those patients initially felt to require abdominoperineal
While studies have suggested that response to preoperative chemoradiation may
impact the rate of sphincter-preserving surgery,[2,22] those analyses were not
originally designed to answer that question. At MDACC, the sphincter
preservation rate in patients with low rectal cancer following preoperative
chemoradiation has increased with time and is currently greater than 60% for
tumors < 6 cm or less from the anal verge. A logistic regression analysis of
clinical, treatment-related, and pathologic factors among 238 patients with
tumors < 6 cm from the anal verge indicated that complete clinical response
to preoperative chemoradiation is an independent predictor of sphincter
Clinical complete response rate was 46%, and tumors < 3 cm or less from the anal
verge that responded completely to preoperative chemoradiation had the most
striking difference in sphincter-preserving surgery (44% vs 23%, P = .01)
compared to those who did not respond completely. Importantly, the pelvic
recurrence rate among patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery has been
less than 10% since 1993, and no increase in pelvic recurrence risk has been
observed with the use of sphincter-preserving procedures in the low rectum
(unpublished observations). Thus, increasing the response rate could lead to
increased rates of sphincter preservation or even rectal preservation.
Of 362 patients with T3 rectal cancer treated at MDACC with preoperative
chemoradiation and surgery over the past decade, 17 patients with localized
disease have been selected for local excision due to patient refusal of
abdominoperineal resection, medical comorbidity, physician preference after a
complete clinical response, or unknown reasons. Local excision was performed
after completion of chemoradiation. With a median follow-up of 34 months (range:
6 to 96 months), only 1 of 17 patients has had intrapelvic recurrence and
another has had disease recur in an inguinal lymph node. Two patients have died
of metastatic rectal cancer and one has died of unknown causes.
The 5-year actuarial overall survival at 5 years was 67%. Twelve of 17 (71%)
patients have achieved pathologic complete response, microscopic residual
disease was evident in 4/17 (24%), and gross residual disease was present in one
patient. This indicates that the response to preoperative chemoradiation may
have played a role in the decision to proceed with local excision rather than
abdominoperineal resection in some patients. Furthermore, it appears that
preoperative chemoradiation followed by local excision provides effective local
control in highly selected cases. This strategy should be studied prospectively
in patients with low rectal cancer who respond to chemoradiation.
Previously, we reported that response to preoperative chemoradiation (defined
as evidence of microscopic or no residual disease) is a positive predictor of
improved overall survival (P = .07). At the time of that analysis, the
follow-up duration and patient numbers were insufficient to demonstrate
statistical significance. We recently reported results involving a larger
patient cohort, which showed that response (defined as evidence for T-stage
down-staging without nodal positivity) is a positive predictor of
disease-free and overall survival. The presence of microscopic or no
residual disease also positively predicted survival on univariate analysis in
this updated experience (P = .002, Figure
2). A Cox regression multivariate
analysis confirmed this finding as well as the negative influence of poor
differentiation on overall survival (unpublished observations).
1. Minsky BD, Coia L, Haller D, et al: Treatment systems guidelines for
primary rectal cancer from the 1996 Patterns of Care Study. Int J Radiat Oncol
Biol Phys 41(1):21-27, 1998.
2. Vauthey JN, Marsh RW, Zlotecki RA, et al: Recent advances in the treatment
and outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer. Ann Surg 229(5):745-754, 1999.
3. Rich TA, Skibber JM, Ajani JA, et al: Preoperative infusional
chemoradiation therapy for stage T3 rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
4. Janjan NA, Khoo VS, Abbruzzese J, et al: Tumor downstaging and sphincter
preservation with preoperative chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer:
The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
5. Frykholm G, Glimelius B, Pahlman L: Preoperative or postoperative
irradiation in adenocarcinoma of the rectum: Final treatment results of a
randomized trial and an evaluation of late secondary effects. Dis Colon Rectum
6. Improved survival with preoperative radiotherapy in resectable rectal
cancer. Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial [see comments] N Engl J Med 336(14):980-987,
1997 (published erratum appears in N Engl J Med 336:1539, 1997).
7. Krook JE, Moertel CG, Gunderson LL, et al: Effective surgical adjuvant
therapy for high-risk rectal carcinoma [see comments]. N Engl J Med
8. Prolongation of the disease-free interval in surgically treated rectal
carcinoma. Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group. N Engl J Med 312(23):1465-1472,
9. O’Connell M, Martenson JA, Wieand HS, et al: Improving adjuvant therapy
for rectal cancer by combining protracted-infusion fluorouracil with radiation
therapy after curative surgery. N Engl J Med 331(8):502-507, 1994.
10. Mitchell E, Anne P, Fry R, et al: Combined modality therapy of locally
advanced or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the rectum: Report of a phase I trial of
chemotherapy with CPT-11, 5-FU, and concomitant irradiation (abstract 519). Proc
Am Soc Clin Oncol 20:131a, 2001
11. Mason K, Komaki R, Cox J, et al: Biology-based combined modality
radiotherapy: Workshop report. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 50(4):1079-1089,
12. Masferrer JL, Leahy KM, Koki AT, et al: Antiangiogenic and antitumor
activities of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Cancer Res 60(5):1306-1311, 2000.
13. Sheehan KM, Sheahan K, O’Donoghue DP, et al: The relationship between
cyclooxygenase-2 expression and colorectal cancer. JAMA 282(13):1254-1257, 1999.
14. Milas L, Kishi K, Hunter N, et al: Enhancement of tumor response to
gamma-radiation by an inhibitor of cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme. J Natl Cancer Inst
15. Hida T, Kozaki K, Muramatsu H, et al: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor induces
apoptosis and enhances cytotoxicity of various anticancer agents in non-small
cell lung cancer cell lines. Clin Cancer Res 6(5):2006-2011, 2000.
16. Thun MJ, Namboodiri MM, Heath CW, Jr: Aspirin use and reduced risk of
fatal colon cancer. N Engl J Med 325(23):1593-1596, 1991.
17. Giovannucci E, Egan KM, Hunter DJ, et al: Aspirin and the risk of
colorectal cancer in women. N Engl J Med 333(10):609-614, 1995.
18. Steinbach G, Lynch PM, Phillips RK, et al: The effect of celecoxib, a
cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in familial adenomatous polyposis. N Engl J Med
19. Sanfilippo N, Crane C, Skibber J, et al: T4 rectal cancer treated with
preoperative chemoradiation to the posterior pelvis followed by multivisceral
resection: patterns of failure and limitations of treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol
Biol Phys 51(1), 2001.
20. Minsky BD: Sphincter preservation in rectal cancerContinued evidence
of success. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 46(2):267-268, 2000.
21. Hyams DM, Mamounas EP, Petrelli N, et al: A clinical trial to evaluate
the worth of preoperative multimodality therapy in patients with operable
carcinoma of the rectum: A progress report of National Surgical Breast and Bowel
Project Protocol R-03. Dis Colon Rectum 40(2):131-139, 1997.
22. Janjan NA, Crane CH, Feig BW, et al: Prospective trial of preoperative
concomitant boost radiotherapy with continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil for
locally advanced rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47(3):713-718,
23. Crane C, Skibber J, Brown T, et al: An evaluation of clinical prognostic
factors and the concomitant boost technique on sphincter preservation in
low-lying rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. 2nd
International Symposium, Sphincter Saving Treatment in Rectal Cancer. Lyon,
24. Janjan NA, Abbruzzese J, Pazdur R, et al: Prognostic implications of
response to preoperative infusional chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal
cancer. Radiother Oncol 51(2):153-160, 1999.
25. Janjan NA, Crane C, Feig BW, et al: Improved overall survival among
responders to preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. Am
J Clin Oncol 24(2):107-112, 2001.
26. Kirichenko AV, Rich TA, Newman RA, et al: Potentiation of murine MCa-4
carcinoma radioresponse by 9-amino-20(S)-camptothecin. Cancer Res
27. Cunningham D, Glimelius B: A phase III study of irinotecan (CPT-11)
versus best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who
have failed 5-fluorouracil therapy. V301 Study Group. Semin Oncol 26(1 suppl
28. Van Cutsem E, Blijham GH: Irinotecan versus infusional 5-fluorouracil: A
phase III study in metastatic colorectal cancer following failure on first-line
5-fluorouracil. V302 Study Group. Semin Oncol 26(1 suppl 5):13-20, 1999.
29. Saltz LB, Cox JV, Blanke C, et al: Irinotecan plus fluorouracil and
leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. Irinotecan Study Group [see
comments]. N Engl J Med 343(13):905-914, 2000.
30. Brunda MJ, Herberman RB, Holden HT: Inhibition of murine natural killer
cell activity by prostaglandins. J Immunol 124(6):2682-2687, 1980.
31. Honn KV, Bockman RS, Marnett LJ: Prostaglandins and cancer: A review of
tumor initiation through tumor metastasis. Prostaglandins 21(5):833-864, 1981.
32. Furuta Y, Hall ER, Sanduja S, et al: Prostaglandin production by murine
tumors as a predictor for therapeutic response to indomethacin. Cancer Res
33. Taketo MM: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in tumorigenesis (part II). J Natl
Cancer Inst 90(21):1609-1620, 1998.
34. Masferrer JL, Isakson PC, Seibert K: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: A new
class of anti-inflammatory agents that spare the gastrointestinal tract.
Gastroenterol Clin North Am 25(2):363-372, 1996.
35. Milas L, Hanson WR: Eicosanoids and radiation. Eur J Cancer
36. Milas L, Furuta Y, Hunter N, et al: Dependence of indomethacin-induced
potentiation of murine tumor radioresponse on tumor host immunocompetence.
Cancer Res 50(15):4473-4477, 1990.
37. Furuta Y, Hunter N, Barkley T, Jr, et al: Increase in radioresponse of
murine tumors by treatment with indomethacin. Cancer Res 48(11):3008-3013, 1988.
38. Kishi K, Peterson S, Peterson C, et al: Preferential enhancement of tumor
radioresponse by a COX-2 inhibitor. Cancer Res 60(5):1326-1331, 2000.